(t)M% 


^j^.!,^ 


\t'^-+'—  / 


^i.       C 


:00^^^M^ 


^£.^'^4,.t*4^-<4«H>.«^4i^ 


^  ^^A^^t^,^J^ 


The  Relatioi  of  Christian  Educators  to  tlie  Mm  Ehases  of  Science. 


By  DANIEL  S.  MARTIN.  A.  M., 

Professor  of  Geology  and,  Natural  History  in  Rutgers  Female  College^ 


From  the   Proceedings  of  the  University  Convocation,  held  at  Albany,  N.  Y. 
July  29th,  30th  and    31st,  1873. 


S 


} 


THE  RELATION  OF  CHRISTIAN  EDUCATORS  TO  THE  MODERN 
PHASES  OF  SCIENCE. 


By  Daniel  S.  Martin,  A.  M.  , 

Professor  of  Geology  and  Natural  History  in  Rutgers  Female  College. 


Gentlemen  of  the  Convocation. — In  presenting  you  with  a  few 
thoughts  in  regard  to  the  relation  of  the  Christian  educator  to  the 
modern  problems  of  science,  I  must  begin  by  saying  that  it  is  with 
much  hesitation  that  I  approach  this  subject,  partly  because  it  may 
seem,  in  some  respects,  a  very  hackneyed  one,  and  partly  from  the 
great  importance  of  the  theme,  and  the  consequent  difficuhy  of  deal- 
ing with  it  in  any  adequate  manner.  I  am  led  to  the  attempt,  how- 
ever, partly  because  of  that  very  importance  which  renders  it  so  hard 
to  treat  aright,  and  partly  because,  two  years  ago,  in  this  room  and 
before  this  body,  the  gauntlet  was  openly  thrown  down  to  science, 
and  has  not  yet  been  formally  and  fearlessly  taken  up. 

The  whole  subject  seems  divisible  into  three  main  parts,  viz. : 

I.  The  fact  of  a  long  and  lamentable  controversy  between  Christian 
and  scientific  modes  of  thought. 

II.  The  causes  and  reasons  of  this  controversy. 

III.  The  methods  of  its  possible  removal. 

To  these  three  points,  Mr.  Chancellor  and  gentlemen,  I  would, 
therefore,  request  your  attention. 

I.  The  fact  of  such  controversy. 

We  are  certainly  living  in  one  of  the  most  remarkable  periods  of 
the  history  of  our  world, — one  which  is  marked  by  such  vast,  rapid 
and  varied  developments  of  human  progress,  in  its  best  and  noblest 
forms,  as  no  other  age  has  seen.  This  great  advance,  complex  and 
manifold  as  it  is,  we  are  wont  well  to  sum  up  under  the  name  of 
Christian  civilization.  If  we  examine  it,  we  shall  find  it  to  have  in 
general  a  twofold  aspect,  moral  and  material,  and  to  owe  its  wonder- 
ful character  to  this  fact :  it  is  the  expansion  of  human  knowledge, 
culture,  intercourse,  and  invention,  guided  and  directed  by  the  divine 
influence  of  the  Christian  religion.'  It  is  Christianity  and  civilization, 
distinct  in  their  nature  as  heaven  and  earth,  but  united  in  their 
action  on  society,  that  make  this  world  all  that  it  is  to-day,  and  all 
that  it  can  hope  to  become  in  the  future. 
1 


2  University  Convocation. 

Between  these  two  great  forces,  w^hich  together  are  engaged  in  the 
improvement  and  elevation  of  mankind,  one  would  naturally  suppose 
that  there  would  be  the  warmest  and  closest  sympath}-  ;  that  the 
laborers  in  each  department  would  look  with  joy  and  pride  on  the 
achievements  of  their  co-laborers  in  the  other.  But  such  is  not  the 
case.  To  a  limited  extent,  and  in  occasional  instances,  we  do  indeed 
find  such  a  spirit  displayed.  But  I  fear  that  it  is  not  overstating 
the  facts,  to  say  that  the  general  attitude  of  science  and  religion 
toward  each  other  has  been,  and  still  is,  one  of  jealousy,  of  fear,  and 
of  either  open  or  covert  opposition. 

In  every  contest  which  prevails  among  men,  it  is  generally  found 
that,  whatever  real  and  great  grounds  may  exist,  much  of  the 
estrangement  is  due  to  mutual  misunderstandings.  If  these  can  be 
removed,  the  way  to  peace  and  harmony  is  made  far  easier  than  it 
would  otherwise  have  seemed.  In  this  view,  let  us  see  if  it  be  not 
possible  to  trace  some  ways  in  which  we,  as  Christian  educators,  may 
help  to  bring  about  a  better  state  of  feeling  in  this  most  unhappy  con- 
test between  science  and  religion,  in  which,  from  our  very  position, 
we  must,  of  necessity,  in  some  degree  take  part. 

Admitting,  then,  that  such  a  conflict  exists,  as  a  great  and  lamenta- 
ble fact,  we  seek  to  trace  for  a  moment  some  of  its  leading  causes. 

All  false  and  erroneous  systems  of  religion,  from  their  very  nature, 
as  founded  in  and  relying  upon  ignorance,  must  inevitably  hate  and 
oppose  the  enlightenment  of  the  human  mind  in  almost  any  direction, 
as  thereby  their  power  is  weakened  and  their  downfall  shadowed 
forth.  Were  our  inquiry,  therefore,  concerned  with  the  conflict 
between  science  and  religion  as  it  exists  in  pagan  or  Mohammedan 
lands,  or  even  in  those  Christian  countries  which  cherish  any  form  of 
superstition,  the  answer  as  to  the  reason  of  such  opposition  would  be 
easy  and  plain  enough.  But  we  are  looking  to  the  facts  as  they 
appear  in  our  own"  favored  country,  and  in  the  most  advanced  and 
enlightened  communities  of  the  globe.  Why  is  it  that  here  such  a 
discord  still  exists  ?  Why  do  we  find  it  appearing  among  ourselves, 
somewhat  as  it  does  in  lands  overspread  with  superstition  and 
ignorance  ? 

If  we  look  at  the  question,  it  is  certainly  grave  enough  to  attract 
our  most  serious  consideration. 

Returning  again  to  our  former  comparison,  we  see  that  in  every 
human  contest  or  disagreement,  there  are  almost  invariably  faults 
and  errors  on  both  sides,  which,  in  some  degree,  divide  the  responsi- 
bility between  the  two  parties  to  the  strife.     So^  undoubtedly,  will  it 


Christian  Educators  and  Modern  Science.  3 

be  found  to  be  here.  The  errors,  the  faults,  are  not  confined  to 
either  side ;  and  it  will  be  the  object  of  this  paper  to  seek  to  point 
out  impartially  some  of  these  causes. 

Here  we  may  as  well  define  our  position  at  once,  as  standing  on 
the  basis  of  faith  in  the  Christian  Scriptures,  as  embodying  the  revela- 
tion of  Himself  by  the  living  God  and  personal  Creator  of  the  uni- 
verse, and  containing  "  all  things  that  pertain  unto  life  and  godliness, 
through  the  knowledge  of  God  arid  of  Jesus  our  Lord."  We  have 
no  desire  to  discuss  this  question,  or  any  other,  from  any  different 
stand-point,  and  would  decline  to  enter  at  present  into  any  debate 
that  involves  this  position.  It  is  to  Christian  educators,  and  to  such 
alone,  that  this  discussion  is  presented. 

II.  Turning  now  to  the  causes  of  the  conflict  alluded  to,  we  find 
that  there  is  one  important  reason  which  depends  on  the  fundamental 
position  of  the  Christian  faith.  Explain  it  as  we  may,  the  idea  of  a 
living,  personal  God  is  displeasing  to  many  men,  and  they  seek  to  avoid 
it  by  whatever  means  can  be  found.  Both  philosophy  and  science 
afford  to  such  minds  an  endless  series  of  opportunities  for  raising 
questions  and  difiiculties  as  to  the  being  or  the  personality  of  a  God  ; 
and  thus  it  comes  to  pass  that  there  is,  and  has  been,  a  long,  active, 
and  irreconcilable  conflict  between  those  who  accept,  and  those  who 
dispute,  the  fact  of  a  Divine  existence  and  control.  The  former  class, 
of  course,  includes  all  religious  writers  and  thinkers;  the  latter 
includes  many  men  who  have  achieved  intellectual  eminence,  not  only 
in  science,  but  in  various  departments  of  knowledge.  Many  of  these, 
however,  have  been  students  of  nature,  and  have  used  their  discove- 
ries and  reputations  in  support  of  atheistic  views.  Thus,  in  the 
minds  of  many  devout  men,  unacquainted  with  science,  and  judging 
the  whole  body  of  scientific  thinkers  by  a  part  of  their  number,  there 
has  arisen  a  feeling  of  alienation  and  suspicion,  w^hich  has  contributed 
much  to  this  estrangement. 

If  we  go  still  deeper,  however,  and  inquire.  Why  this  disposition  to 
exclude  the  idea  of  God,  which  has  appeared  so  strongly  in  the  writ- 
ings of  scientific  and  philosophical  students?  —  we  are  unable  to 
explain  it,  save  in  the  light  of  that  very  revelation  which  such  writers 
reject.  Here  we  are  told  that  the  whole  race  is  in  some  way  morally 
perverted,  and  alienated  from  God  and  all  true  excellence,  while  retain- 
ing intact  its  intellectual  capacities,  and  also  a  large  residuum  of 
domestic,  social,  and  public  virtue.  If  this  be  so,  as  both  history  and 
inward  experience  attest,  it  is  easy  to  see  why  men,  even  of  the 
highest  intellect,  do  "  not  like  to  retain  God  in  their  knowledge." 


4  University  Convocation, 

^'  Professing  themselves  to  be  wise,  they  became  fools,"  and  "  the 
fool  hath  said  in  his  heart,  there  is  no  God." 

There  is  little  doubt  that  the  disposition  thus  displayed  by  many 
men  of  science,  lies  at  the  root  of  much  of  the  conflict  alluded  to. 
So  far  and  so  often  as  this  tendency  manifests  itself,  it  cannot  but 
awaken  earnest  opposition  and  remonsti-ance,  and  result  in  a  feeling 
of  jealousy  and  suspicion,  on  the  part  of  believers  in  the  greatest  of 
truths. 

Bnt  apart  from  an  absolute  and  intentional  advocacy  of  atheistic 
ideas,  there  is  on  the  part  of  many  scientific  men  a  carelessness,  or 
even  a  hostility,  of  expression  toward  religious  truth,  which  awakens 
deep  distrust.  Even  when  this  is  not  the  case,  there  is  often  a  cer- 
tain kind  of  nature-worship,  a  glorification  of  science  as  the  one  and 
only  agency  in  the  advancement  of  humanity,  and  an  utterly  mate- 
rialistic and  secular  mode  of  speech,  which  cannot  but  offend  and 
repel  many  thoughtful  minds,  who  would  be  ready  enough  to  admit 
and  approve  any  moderate  statement  of  the  claims  of  science.  Pro- 
fessor Huxley,  for  instance,  is  a  man  who  stands  confessedly  among 
the  foremost  naturalists  of  our  day;  and  we  honor  and  admire  him, 
and  rejoice  in  much  that  he  has  done.  But  when  he  tells  us  that 
"objects  of  sense  are  more  worthy  of  attention  than  inferences  and 
imaginations.  You  cannot  see  the  battle  of  Thermopylae  take  place. 
What  you  can  see  is  more  worthy  of  your  attention," — no  earnest  and 
thoughtful  man  can  fail  to  recoil  into  opposition,  both  to  the  logic 
and  to  the  sentiment.  As  for  the  reasoning,  what  can  we  see  with 
the  material  eye  ?  Forms  and  colors  simply,  sometimes  fixed,  some- 
times changing.  Philosopher,  infant,  idiot,  animal, — all  see  these 
same  things,  and  naught  else.  Cause  and  consequence,  attraction 
and  repulsion,  atoms  and  forces,  life  and  energy,  all  these  are  as 
unseen  as  the  battle  of  Thermopylae ;  and  not  only  so,  but  they 
never  have  been  or  can  be  seen,  save  by  the  same  mind,  itself  invisi- 
ble, that  conceives  alike  of  nature  and  of  history,  of  past,  present,  and 
future.  As  to  the  sentiment,  let  us  weigh  carefully  all  that  Professor 
Huxley  has  taught  us,  and  that  is  much,  concerning  zoological  classi- 
fication, and  the  doctrine  of  protoplasm,  and  then  compare  with  it 
the  influence  exerted  on  the  minds  and  hearts  of  men  for  over  2,000 
years  by  the  tale  of  the  heroic  leader  and  undaunted  band,  firm  in 
their  love  and  devotion  to  the  laws  and  honor  and  freedom  of  their 
country,  standing  calmly  to  the  death  in  that  wild  pass  in  Locris, 
Humanity  is  richer  and  nobler  for  it  to-day,  and  will  be  to  the  end  of 
time.     Every  truth  has  its  value,  and  none  is  to  be  lightly  esteemed ; 


Christian  Educators  and  Modern  Science.  5 

bat  all  that  we  have  yet  learned  about  protoplasm,  or  "  Man's  Place 
in  Nature,"  is  powerless  to  stir  the  heart  and  quicken  the  spirit  and 
strengthen  the  hand,  as  does  this  ancient  record,  which  is  part  of  the 
world's  best  and  noblest  heritage.  Nay,  Professor  Huxley  himself 
tells  us  that,  '  if  he  were  compelled  to  choose  between  absolute  mate- 
rialism and  absolute  idealism,  he  should  be  compelled  to  accept  the 
latter  alternative ; '  and  here  the  immortal  man  rises  into  expression 
above  the  mere  student  of  physical  science.  But  this  intense  secu- 
larity,  this  exclusive  looking  at  the  things  that  are  "  seen  and  tem- 
poral," repels  and  prejudices  men  of  earnest  moral  and  spiritual 
thought.  Often  it  is  but  a  manner  of  speech  that  such  writers  fall 
into  unintentionally,  but  it  is  none  the  less  unhappy  in  its  results. 

Quite  apart  from  these  tendencies  that  prevail  among  some  men  of 
science,  there  is  a  large  class  of  unbelievers  and  opposers  of  religion, 
who  have  no  claim  to  scientific  consideration,  and  no  real  care  for 
scientific  interests,  but  who  seize  upon  and  magnify  every  actual  or 
possible  ground  of  difi'erence  between  natural  and  scriptural  truth, 
out  of  mere  hostility  to  the  latter.  Such  persons  gain  prominence 
frequently  as  popular  lecturers,  newspaper  and  magazine  writers,  etc., 
and  create  an  amount  of  noise  and  of  mischief  totally  out  of  propor- 
tion to  their  own  caliber.  They  pervert  and  misrepresent  science  for 
the  sake  of  assailing  religion,  and,  like  the  brutal  camp-followers  of 
an  army,  create  alienations  that  react  upon  the  party  in  whose  uni- 
form and  name  their  excesses  are  committed. 

But  these  are  only  the  more  familiar  of  the  many  aspects  of  this 
subject.  It  now  behooves  us  to  see,  on  the  other  hand,  if  there  be  not 
grounds  of  controversy,  less  vital  and  less  excusable,  on  the  part  of 
the  religious  world. 

Among  the  first  and  most  important  of  these,  seems  to  us  to  be  an 
underestimation  of  pure  science,  and  an  unfamiliarity  with  the  spirit 
of  scientific  investigation.  I  do  not  allude  here  to  that  sordid  view 
which  delights  in  calling  itself  by  the  taking  name  of  "  practical," 
and  which  would  measure  the  capacities  and  achievements  of  the 
human  mind  by  the  standard  of  cash-books  and  dividends.  The 
spirit  to  which  I  refer  is  of  a  nature  far  more  subtle  and  complex. 
In  part,  perhaps,  it  arises  from  a  certain  kind  of  moral  and  religious 
depth  of  feeling,  which,  although  unhappy  and  overstrained,  is  yet 
an  error  only,  and  not  a  folly  or  a  wrong.  Many  earnest  men, 
whose  hearts  are  strongly  impressed  with  tlie  moral  necessities  and 
responsibilities  of  our  race,  and  by  the  fleeting  character  of  all  tempo- 
ral and  earthly  objects,  as  compared  with  the  unending  life  beyond, 


6  University  Convocation: 

have  been   unable  to  feel  mnch  interest  in  the  pursuits  of  pure  sci- 
ence, and  have  looked  upon  them  as  really  of  but  little  moment. 

There  is  a  great  truth  in  this  view,  and  a  great  error  likewise. 
We  respect  the  feeling  from  which  it  springs,  while  we  regret  the 
tendency  that  results.  To  some  minds,  it  may  be  unavoidable  to  feel 
thus,  overpowered  by  the  sense  of  vast  and  endless  issues  depending 
on  these  few  years  which  their  fellow-men  around  them  are  hurrying 
through,  careless,  hopeless,  and  Godless.  This  is  especially  the  case 
with  some  Christian  ministers,  whose  hearts  not  only,  but  whose 
hands,  are  filled  and  burdened  with  a  work  of  the  greatest  and  most 
absorbing  responsibility.  But  all  forms  of  human  activity  and  pro- 
gress are  so  bound  together  that  they  cannot  be  separated  ;  and  any 
feeling  of  this  kind  would,  if  logically  carried  out,  condemn  the  world 
to  ignorance  and  stagnation. 

There  is  yet  another  feeling  somewhat  akin  to  this  last,  but  far  less 
excusable.  I  think  there  is  a  lingering  idea  in  many  minds  that  there 
is  something  a  little  daring  and  irreverent  in  thus  pressing  into  the 
inmost  recesses  of  life  and  of  natui'e.  This  idea,  so  far  as  we  have  it, 
is  a  faint  echo  of  classical  or  other  heathenism,  of  systems  in  which 
man  was  so  nearly  equal  to  the  gods,  that  the  latter  had  all  the  time 
to  keep  him  at  arm's  length  in  order  to  their  own  "  tenure  of  office." 
The  universe  was,  in  this  state  of  belief,  like  some  large  manufactory, 
with  a  high  board  fence,  from  which  the  proprietors,  who  have  pirated, 
bought,  or  invented,  some  improved  processes,  are  forced  rigorously 
to  exclude  all  inquiring  visitors,  and  so  fasten  up  "  Positively  No 
Admittance"  on  every  avenue  of  approach.  The  lingering  remnant 
of  this  feeling,  which,  perhaps,  is  more  wide-spread  than  would  be 
readily  admitted,  is  fainter  now  than  it  has  probably  ever  been  in  the 
history  of  the  world  before.  But  it  is  well  that  we  should  note  it  as 
one  element  of  our  subject.  It  betrays  itself  in  such  common  expres- 
sions as  "daring  investigators,"  or  "wresting  her  secrets  from 
unwilling  nature,"  etc.,  which  have  no  propriety  save  where  actual 
hardship  or  peril  is  involved.  It  is  the  old  idea  of  the  jealousy  of 
a  miserable  tribe  of  divinities,  aroused  by  the  power  and  energy  of 
man  : 

**  Audax  omnia  perpeti 
Gens  humana  ruit  per  vetitum  nefas. 
*  *  *  * 

Nil  mortalibus  ardui  est ; 
Coelum  ipsum  petimus  stultitia,  neque 

Per  nostrum  patimur  scelus 
Iracunda  Jovem  ponere  fulmina." 


Christian  Educators  and  Modern  Science.  7 

How  grand  is  the  contrast  in  tlie  Old  Testament  Scriptures! 
"  The  heaven,  even  the  heavens,  are  the  Lord's,  but  the  earth  hath  He 
given  to  the  children  of  men,"  and  that  long-earlier  utterance  from 
God  himself,  giving  universal  dominion  to  our  race,  and  issuing  the 
command  to  subdue  the  earth.  And  not  only  in  the  Old  Testament, 
but  all  through  the  Scriptures,  while  there  is  the  most  positive  asser- 
tion of  the  weakness  of  human  wisdom  in  the  sight  of  God,  and  of  its 
total  inadequacy  to  help  or  save  men  in  moral  and  spiritual  relations, 
there  is  not  a  trace  of  this  heathen  idea  of  a  divine  jealousy  of  man's 
attainments  in  the  study  of  nature.  Tflie  whole  suggestion  should  be 
relegated  forthwith  to  the  region  of  omens,  witchcraft,  and  spirit- 
rappings. 

But  it  is  rather  to  a  more  general  kind  of  estrangement  between 
the  religious  and  the  scientific  modes  of  thought  and  investigation, — a 
mutual  want  of  intercourse,  appreciation,  and  understanding, — that 
we  must  attribute  a  great  deal  of  the  difficulty.  In  this  respect,  the 
blame  is  about  equally  divided  between  the  two  sides;  and  the 
remedy  lies,  in  part,  with  whichever  will  recognize  the  error. 
Our  religious  writers  and  thinkers  hold  aloof  too  generally  from 
scientific  men.  They  have  not  learned,  or  do  nat  cultivate,  a  spirit 
of  hearty  interest  in  scientific  achievements  and  inquiries.  Looking 
upon  the  study  of  nature  as  something  wholly  foreign  to  their 
chosen  field,  a  feeling  grows  up  that  "  the  Jews  have  no  dealings 
with  the  Samaritans ; "  and  the  result  is  a  great  and  mournful  con- 
troversy. 

If  we  should  yet  again  recur  to  our  former  illustration,  we  should 
find  it  universally  recognized  that  intercourse  between  nations  is 
usually  one  of  the  surest  safeguards  against  war;  and  that  just  in  pro- 
portion as  men  and  communities  learn  to  know  each  other,  visit  each 
others'  homes,  and  look  in  each  others'  faces,  and  feel  the  com- 
mon humanity  that  lives  and  looks  and  speaks  in  each  and  all,  so  far 
does  the  idea  of  conflict  become  painful  and  abhorrent,  and  the  possi- 
bility of  peace  and  of  harmony  increase. 

It  is  this  holding  aloof,  this  separation  between  our  religious  and 
our  scientific  thinkers,  that  more  than  anything  else,  perhaps,  gives 
rise  to  this  state  of  discord.  Insomuch  is  this  recognized  as  the  pre- 
vailing condition  of  affairs,  that  any  exception  to  it  is  regarded  as 
unusual  and  singular.  Scientific  men  are  apt  to  regard  with  feelings, 
and  even  with  expressions,  of  pleased  surprise,  a  minister  who  can 
meet  them  in  anything  like  free  and  intelligent  converse  on  ques- 
tions of  recent  scientific  discovery.     It  is  not,  I  think,  overstating  the 


8  University  Convocation. 

facts,  to  say  that  such  cases  are  really  rare.  The  consequence  is,  that 
between  the  expounders  of  these  two  great  modes  of  thought  there 
is  little  or  none  of  that  harmonizing  and  softening  influence,  that 
springs  from  tlie  friendly  comparison  of  even  widely  differing  views. 
Hardly  to  be  separated  from  this  last-mentioned  cause,  and  in  great 
part  due  to  it,  is  the  existence  of  a  vast  amount  of  positive  ignorance, 
on  each  side,  as  to  the  well-known  truths  and  principles  of  the  other. 
This  fact  is  one  of  the  most  conspicuous  possible  to  those  who  have 
any  real  acquaintance  with  both  departments,  and  yet  it  seems  to  be 
completely  unknown  or  unheeded  by  the  disputants.  With  what 
coolness  and  assumption  do  scientific  writers  all  the  time  undertake 
to  extend  their  reasonings  into  subjects  w^holly  diiferent  in  kind  from 
those  in  which  such  reasonings  are  valid !  How  often  are  the  rules 
of  logic,  and  the  well-known  principles  of  philosophical  reasoning, 
quietly  dispensed  with,  in  order  to  introduce  the  celebrated  "  methods 
of  induction"  into  some  new  and  untried  field,  wherein  experimental 
or  statistical  tests  are  impossible,  and  induction  therefore  worthless. 
On  the  other  hand,  what  surprising  ignorance  of  familiar  facts  in 
recent  science  may  be  found  "full-high  displayed"  in  many  reviews 
of  scientific  books  and  essays  attempted  in  our  religious  journals.  It 
would  be  ludicrous,  if  it  were  not  so  melancholy,  to  witness  the  treat- 
ment received  in  such  quarters  by  many  of  the  grandest  achieve- 
ments of  our  day.  We  no  longer  hear  any  question  raised  as  to 
antipodes,  or  the  motions  of  the  earth  ;  that  is  thoroughly  past.  But 
there  are  still  to  be  found  men  of  high  intelligence  and  culture 
who  hesitate  about  the  clearest  principles  of  geology,  mock  at  the 
glacial  era,  and  set  themselves  in  the  face  of  the  whole  grand  series 
of  conceptions  which  begin  to  entitle  the  modern  student  to  the  high 
name  of  "  interpres  naturm^^'^  while  no  less  rninistering  to  an  intelli- 
gent and  earnest  Christian  faith.  Two  such  volumes  have  been 
given  to  the  American  public  within  the  past  year,  and  they  have 
attracted  much  attention.  One  of  these,  in  particular,  has  been 
lauded  to  the  skies  in  at  least  one  leading  religious  journal ;  a  work 
with  a  sounding  Latin  title,  and  coolly  dedicated  to  the  Supreme 
Creator,  but  occupied  largely  with  an  onslaught  upon  the  grandest 
scientific  generalization  as  to  the  Creators  method  which  the  human 
mind  has  attained— the  JNebular  Theory  of  the  universe.  Eitlier  not 
knowing,  or  not  caring  to  know,  that  this  conception  of  the  philoso- 
pher Kant,  as  well  as  of  the  astronomer  Laplace,  has  long  since  passed 
into  the  recognized  mental  furniture  of  almost  every  student  of  physi- 
cal science,  and  is  receiving  new  and  cumulative  proofs  from  year  to 


Christian  Educators  and  Modern  Science.  9 

year,  the  author  of  this  treatise  assails  it  with  a  tempest  of  convulsive 
rhetoric,  only  comparable  to  the  frantic  gong-beating  of  a  "  heathen 
Chinee,"  under  the  frightful  apprehension  of  the  sun's  being  swal- 
lowed by  a  dragon.  The  remedy,  in  both  cases,  is  equally  adapted  to 
the  nature  and  extent  of  the  peril. 

But  the  mischief  which  such  writings  are  calculated  to  do  is 
extremely  grave.  They  widen  terribly  the  breach  between  science 
and  faith,  and  increase  and  multiply  the  difficulties  and  dangers  to  be 
encountered  by  many  minds,  in  passing  from  the  receptive  stage  of 
youth  to  the  reflective  stage  of  independent  manhood.  It  is  one  of 
the  saddest  aspects  of  modern  culture,  this  hostile  position  occupied 
by  so  many  expounders  of  science  and  of  religion.  There  are  infinite 
shipwrecks, — shipwrecks  of  faith,  usefulness,  and  heaven, — that  have' 
happened,  and  will  happen,  again  and  again,  from  this  only  cause. 
The  fearful  w^ords  of  our  Saviour  in  regard  to  "  offenses,"  come  forci- 
bly to  mind  in  dwelling  on  this  theme  ;  and  I  can  scarce  conceive  of 
a  higher  responsibility  resting  on  a  Christian  educator,  than  that  of 
so  training  the  minds  that  come  under  his  charge  that  they  shall  be 
able  to  pass  safely  through  these  ordeals  of  intellectual  conflict.  But 
no  man  can  lead  others  in  a  path  that  he  does  not  himself  know  and 
follow ;  and  hence  it  becomes  every  such  guide  and  trainer  of  youth 
to  look  well  to  his  own  foundations  and  methods. 

This  want  of  acquaintance  with  scientific  truth  on  the  part  of  so 
many  Christian  writers  and  teachers,  arises  from  several  causes. 
Some  of  these  I  have  already  alluded  to  independently,  viz.  :  (1)  the 
absorbing  claims  and  responsibilities  of  the  ministerial  calling,  and 
the  overshadow^ing  weight  of  great  moral  themes ;  (2)  a  lingering 
half-doubt  as  to  the  legitimacy  of  the  spirit  of  universal  investigation  ; 
and  (3),  and  most  important,  a  want  of  sympathy  and  intercourse  with 
men  of  scientific  pursuits.  Among  other  grounds  I  would  mention 
the  following  as  of  most  importance :  (1)  the  want  of  proper  scien- 
tific instruction  in  the  course  of  education  ;  (2)  the  lack  of  ready 
means  for  keeping  pace  with  the  vast  and  ever-widening  progress  of 
scientific  research. 

The  want  of  proper  scientific  instruction  in  youth,  is  an  evil  which 
belongs  to  the  past,  but  which  need  not,  and,  we  may  hope,  will  not  be 
felt  so  much  in  the  future.  The  men  who  graduate  from  our  colleges 
now  have  generally  some  fair  amount  of  information  in  the  depart- 
ment of  science,  and  some  interest  in  it ;  in  many  cases  this  interest  is 
very  great,  and  it  is  only  needful  to  refer  for  examples  to  tlie  scien- 
tific culture  and  capacity  of  many  of  our  most  honored  and  devoted 


10  University  Convocation. 

foreign  missionaries.  But  not  all  our  colleges  are  careful  and  active 
in  this  matter  even  yet ;  and  in  our  theological  seminaries,  where 
some  acquaintance  with  science  should  be  a  matter  of  most  earnest 
heed,  what  provision  does  it  receive?  We  do  occasionally  hear  of  a 
course  of  lectures  before  a  theological  seminary  by  some  gentleman, — 
perhaps  able  and  eminent  in  science,  perhaps  otherwise, — on  the 
••'  Relations  of  Science  and  Religion."  The  course  may  be  one  of 
great  value  and  importance,  as  has  been  the  case  with  some  that  have 
been  given  of  late  in  such  connections ;  but  even  then,  half  of  those 
who  attend  it  have  never  received  any  such  previous  training  in  the 
rudiments  of  the  subject  as  would  enable  them  to  grasp  the  real 
import  of  the  facts  and  distinctions  cited.  They  hear  of  the  origin  of 
species  and  varieties,  of  the  principles  of  structural  classification,  of 
the  correspondence  between  the  succession  of  types  in  time  and  their 
advancement  in  rank,  etc.,  without,  perhaps,  being  able  to  distinguish 
between  a  species  and  a  variety,  or  having  any  clear  idea  of  the  dif- 
ferences which  determine  grade  in  structure,  and  which,  therefore, 
lie  at  the  basis  of  classification,  and  of  all  our  reasonings  on  the  order 
of  rank  and  the  development  of  life.  If  the  lecturer  is  able  and 
accomplished,  he  is  above  the  majority  of  his  hearers;  and  if  such  is 
not  his  character,  he  is  likely  only  to  do  harm,  and  to  occupy  himself, 
and  entertain  his  audience,  with  rhetorical  demolitions  of  the  glacial 
period,  the  nebular  hypothesis,  or  the  correlation  of  forces,  to  say 
nothing  of  the  doctrine  of  evolution. 

And  here  I  am  brought  to  the  mention  of  two  points,  which  are  of 
vital  importance  in  this  whole  discussion.  These  are,  our  growing 
system  of  "  elective  studies,"  and  the  character  of  our  scientific  text- 
books. 

(A.)  As  to  the  elective  system.  It  has  long  been,  and  still  is,  a 
great  and  perplexing  question  how  to  make  our  college  education 
more  effective,  and  to  enable  it  to  keep  pace  with  the  growth  of 
human  knowledge.  The  advantages  of  a  classical  training  are 
unquestionable ;  but  if  we  attempt  to  gain  the  full  benefit  of  them, 
they  occupy  an  amount  of  time  which  leaves  little  opportunity  for 
the  teaching  of  science,  now  becoming  so  highly  important.  Hence 
has  arisen  the  anti-classical  war,  waged  so  energetically  of  late  years 
in  the  name  of  science  (though  not  largely  by  men  of  true  scientific 
eminence),  under  the  plausible  title  of  The  New  Education. 

As  the  result,  we  have  seen  the  very  wide  adoption  of  a  system  of 
compromise,  by  which  students  are  allowed  to  choose,  in  the  later 
years  of  their  course,  between  scientific  study  on  the  one  hand  and 


Christian  Educators  and  Modern  Science.  11 

the  old  curriculum  of  classical,  literary,  and,  perhaps,  philosophical 
instruction  on  the  other.  This  seems  at  first  sight  very  fair  and  suit- 
able. Every  student  does  as  he  thinks  best  in  his  unfledged  wisdom, 
chooses  those  studies  which  fall  in  with  his  intended  profession,  and 
so  everybody  is  satisfied.  Gentlemen  of  the  Convocation,  fellow- 
instructors  of  youth,  let  us  take  warning  in  time !  What  will  be  the 
result  of  this  system  twenty  years  hence  ?  It  needs  no  prophet  to 
foretell  it.  These  same  evils  and  perils  which  we  have  been  lament- 
ing to-day,  instead  of  being  modified  and  healed,  will  be  greatly 
intensified.  We  shall  have  a  Christian  ministry  wholly  ignorant  of 
science,  and  a  body  of  scientific  men  ignorant,  not  only  of  classics,  so 
necessary  in  scientific  language,  but  of  the  laws  and  principles  of 
philosophical  reasoning.  These  results  may  be  modified,  perhaps,  by 
care  and  watchfulness  on  the  part  of  instructors ;  but  a  more  perni- 
cious and  dangerous  experiment  in  our  college  education  it'  would  be 
hard  to  devise.  Every  young  man,  eagerly  looking  forward  to  life,  is 
anxious,  of  course,  to  make  his  college  training  go  as  far  as  it  can 
toward  fitting  him  for  his  chosen  sphere.  Inevitably,  therefore,  the 
intended  naturalist  drops  philosophy  and  classics,  which  are,  perhaps, 
wearisome  and  dull  to  him,  just  as  soon  as  he  can,  and  spends  his  last 
year  or  two  in  geological  excursions  and  in  the  chemical  laboratory. 
In  like  manner,  the  intended  minister  thinks  he  can  dispense  with 
scientific  studies,  and  gives  himself  to  Greek,  philosophy,  and  rhetori- 
cal practice.  Each,  perhaps,  saves  a  year  and  is  crippled  for  a  life- 
time. That  professional  one-sidedness,  from  which,  arises  so  much  of 
all  this  mournful  separation  and  misunderstanding,  is  fostered  and 
intensified,  and  a  full,  broad,  liberal  scholarship  will  soon  become  a 
thing  of  the  past.  It  is  easy  to  quote  specious  maxims  about  the 
advantages  of  concentrating  energy  on  one  subject,  etc.,  but  these 
will  not  do  away  with  the  facts.  The  true  work  of  the  college  is 
totally  distinct  from  that  of  the  professional  school :  it  is  encyclopae- 
dic, not  specific ;  and  just  so  far  as  we  try  to  combine  the  two,  we 
shall  miserably  err.  The  college  lays  the  broad  foundations  of  gene- 
ral culture,  on  which  the  structure  of  professional  scholarship  shall  be 
afterward  reared ;  and  if  it  take  cognizance  at  all  of  the  intended 
career  of  the  student,  its  aim  should  rather  be  to  supply  and  develop 
those  forms  of  mental  training  from  which  his  future  course  will  tend 
by  disuse  to  lead  him  away. 

But,  it  will  be  asked,  what  is  to  be  done  ?  There  is  not  time  in 
the  college  course  for  all  that  it  seems  indispensable  to  have  taught. 
I  have  not  space  now,  nor  would  it  fall  altogether  within  the  scope 


12  University  Convocation, 

of  this  essay,  to  enter  upon  such  a  discussion.  But  almost  anything 
were  better  than  such  a  perilous  separation  between  professional 
modes  of  thought.  It  is  bad  enough  certainly  now,  even  before  the 
men  trained  under  the  elective  system  have  come  forward  into  promi- 
nence. There  is  already  plenty  of  loose  logic  in  the  reasoning,  and 
of  bad  classics  in  the  nomenclature,  to  be  found  in  our  scientific 
works,  and  plenty  of  ignorance  of  science  in  our  theological  and  reli- 
gious writers.  Gentlemen  of  the  Convocation,  let  it  be  our  most 
earnest  aim,  in  whatever  manner  and  measure  we  can,  to  avoid 
increasing  these  evils.  If  the  elective  system  has  to  be  employed,  let 
it  be  guarded  with  watchful  care.  Let  a  certain  amount  of  scientific 
training,  in  principles  rather  than  details,  be  rigorously  insisted  on 
for  every  man  who  passes  through  the  college  course,  especially  if  he 
looks  forward  to  the  ministry ;  and  likewise,  let  every  "  scientific 
course  "  be  required  to  include  the  departments  of  mental  philosophy 
and  logic,  and  I  may  add,  perhaps,  of  Christian  evidences. 

(B.)  But  I  pass  to  the  other  point  of  w^eakness  in  our  scientific 
instruction,  that  of  text-books.  I  am  sure  that  my  friend.  Professor 
Hartt,  will  bear  me  out  in  all  that  I  may  say  on  this  point,  and  I 
rejoice  that  he  is  with  us  in  this  meeting,  as  representing  the  depart- 
ment of  geology  and  natural  history,  in  which  I  should  otherwise 
stand  ''  solitary  and  alone." 

What  sort  of  text-books  have  we  in  science?  In  chemistry  and 
physics  we  are  far  better  off  than  in  the  natural  sciences  proper;  but 
even  in  the  former  the  ideal  book  is  very  far  from  being  at  hand.  In 
geology  w'e  have  fortunately  had  Professor  Dana's  admirable  volume 
for  ten  years  past.  But  what  is  the  geology  of  ten  years  ago,  or,  one 
might  almost  say,  of  five  years  ago,  to-day  ?  Many  doubtful  points 
have  been  solved,  many  missing  links  supplied,  and  many  new  and 
most  important  additions  and  modifications  have  arisen ;  others  are 
arising  from  year  to  year,  and  almost  from  month  to  month.  If  the 
teacher  is  one  who  can  supplement  the  text-book  largely  by  lectures 
on  these  points,  very  much  is  gained  ;  this  is  w^hat  every  college  pro- 
fessor is  properly  expected  to  do.  But  for  the  multitude  of  teachers 
who  are  not  specialists,  the  men  who  have  the  principal  work  of  an 
academy  or  seminary  on  their  hands,  this  is  generally  impossible. 
The  information  of  recent  discoveries  does  not  reach  them ;  or  if  it 
does,  it  is  only  in  such  fragmentary  and  unreliable  forms  that  they 
can  make  no  real  use  of  it.  In  the  department  of  zoology  the  case  is 
ten  times  worse.  With  the  exception  of  elaborate  works,  too  large  and 
too  expensive  to  be  used  by  students  as  text-books,  such  as  Carpen* 


Christian  Educators  and  Modern  Science.  13 

ter's  Principles  of  Comparative  Physiology,  Owen's  Anatomy  of 
Vertebrates  and  of  Invertebrates,  Herbert  Spencer's  Principles  of 
Biology,  etc.,  we  have  no  work  on  philosophical  zoology  that  is 
worth  naming.  Tliere  are  some  few  small  text-books  in  this  depart- 
ment ;  but  they  are  superficial  and  merely  descriptive,  not  entering 
at  all  into  the  real  foundations  of  the  science.  One  work  on  the 
principles  of  zoology,  that  is  still  largely  in  use,  was  from  the  first 
exceedingly  weak  and  defective  at  many  points,  and  has  actually  had 
no  revision  in  more  than  twenty  years  that  have  elapsed  since  its 
issue ! !  AVhat  sort  of  knowledge  can  be  gained  from  such  a  text- 
book to-day  ? 

Here,  again,  there  is  an  "  evil  under  the  sun,"  which  calls  for 
decided  remark.  I  alhide  to  the  stereotyping  of  text-books  in  sci- 
ence. Such  a  work  can  no  more  be  of  high  value,  unless  revised 
from  edition  to  edition,  than  can  the  mirror  of  a  solar  microscope, 
unless  made  to  follow  the  change  of  position  of  the  sun.  But  when 
such  a  book  is  issued  and  puffed  and  advertised,  the  object  is  to 
''  make  it  pay,"  and  to  run  it  through  a  number  of  editions  with  the 
least  expense  and  the  most  profit.  Of  course,  therefore,  it  is  stereo- 
typed ;  and  then  no  pains  are  spared  to  keep  it  in  use  as  long  as  possi- 
ble unaltered,  and  to  hide  and  palliate  every  defect  that  the  constant 
advance  of  science  may  reveal  or  cause.  After  some  years,  notes  or 
an  appendix  will  be  added,  covering  so  much  new  matter  as  can  be 
introduced  without  involving  too  great  a  change  in  the  work,  and  it 
is  then  put  forth  with  new  energy.  I  have  particularly  in  mind  a 
most  flagrant  case  that  occurred  within  a  year  or  two  past,  in  which 
an  eminent  publishing  house  prepared  in  this  way  a  revised  edition 
of  a  text-book  on  chemistry.  The  book  had  been  a  good  one  in  its 
day,  and  the  reviser  was  an  able  and  excellent  man.  But  instead  of 
simply  announcing  these  facts,  and  commending  the  work  on  that 
basis,  which  would  have  been  perfectly  fair,  the  publishers,  in  their 
advertising  journal,  professedly  "  devoted  to  the  interests  of  educa- 
tion," made  a  violent  assault  on  the  new  system  of  chemical  nomen- 
clature, on  the  most  flimsy  grounds,  dissuading  teachers  from  adopt- 
ing it  by  all  the  trivial  arguments  that  could  be  urged.  Their  own 
revised  volume,  of  course,  followed  the  old  method ;  and  here  was 
presented  the  spectacle  of  a  so-called  educational  paper  fighting 
against  the  progress  and  improvement  of  chemical  instruction,  in  the 
interest  of  the  publishers'  cash-book.  Every  teacher  will  recall  the 
bitterness  with  which  some  publishers  seek  to  disparage  the  works  of 
rival  houses,  and  the  harshness  and  grossness  which  have  at  times 


14  University  Convocation, 

made  such  publishers'  circulars  and  "journals  "  worthy  competitors 
with  the  lowest  style  of  political  newspapers. 

We  need,  moreover,  a  wholly  different  kind  of  text-books  for  the 
teaching  of  science.  The  bane  of  all  of  them  is  the  large  proportion 
of  detail  that  is  given,  and  the  small  amount  of  principles.  Details 
belong  to  the  professional  student ;  the  principles  should  form  part  of 
the  liberal  education  of  every  man  and  woman.  Details  are,  of  neces- 
sity, forgotten  ;  principles  can  be  retained:  and  if  the  latter  be  once 
mastered  and  lield,  any  details  that  may  be  needed  in  after  life  can 
easily  be  gained ;  while  no  amount  of  half-remembered  particulars 
will  enable  a  man  to  grasp  at  will  the  general  laws  of  a  science ;  the 
former  are  of  value  only  as  they  illustrate  the  latter.  What  is 
needed  in  the  crowded  years  of  a  college  course  is  a  class  of  brief  text- 
books, that  shall  clearly  present  the  general  principles  in  each  depart- 
ment of  science.  These  manuals  should  never  be  stereotyped,  but 
should  be  revised  every  year  or  two,  perhaps  by  a  committee  of  pro- 
fessors appointed  for  the  purpose,  so  as  to  make  the  instruction  of  our 
colleges  and  seminaries  keep  pace  with  the  swift  advances  of  science. 
They  should  then  be  thoroughly  studied  and  recited  upon  by  the 
class,  while  all  the  details  which  it  is  desirable  or  possible  to  bring  in 
should  be  given  by  the  professor  or  teacher  in  the  form  of  lectures 
and  illustrations.  The  professional  scientific  instructor  can  do  this 
from  his  own  resources  ;  the  general  teacher,  by  means  of  reading 
and  studying  for  the  purpose. 

Such  manuals,  moreover,  would  serve  to  suppl}-  another  want  to 
which  allusion  was  made  just  now,  viz. :  that  of  some  ready  means  by 
which  men  in  all  professions  might  gain,  in  brief  compass,  a  trust- 
worthy account  of  the  progress  of  natural  and  physical  sciences  in 
their  several  departments. 

I  would  earnestly  suggest  that  the  Board  of  Regents  should  take  some 
action  looking  toward  such  a  system,  or  at  least  that  some  committee  be 
appointed  among  the  professors  of  the  State,  to  consider  the  possibili- 
ties and  the  means  of  its  adoption.  The  Board  might  also  require 
certain  standard  works  in  recent  science,  and  the  annuals  of  scientific 
discovery  from  year  to  year,  to  be  placed  in  the  library  of  every  institu- 
tion reporting  to  them,  or  partaking  of  the  Literature  Fund  of  the 
State. 

But  I  have,  perhaps,  wandered  too  far  from  the  immediate  theme 
of  this  paper,  and  must  pass  rapidly  on  to  its  conclusion.  In  speak- 
ing of  the  frequent  estrangement  or  want  of  sympathy  which  exists 
between  religious  and  scientific  thinkers,  I  have  traced  it  largely  to  a 


Christian  Educators  and  Modern  Science.  15 

mutual  ignorance  of  each  others'  real  positions  and  views ;  and  this 
ignorance,  I  have  sought  in  turn  to  trace  partly  to  certain  defects  in 
our  system  of  instruction.  The  mention  of  these  has  led  to  a  digres- 
sion as  to  the  possibility  of  improvements,  hardly  germane  to  the 
original  subject. 

One  of  the  last  and  most  important  points  worthy  of  especial  men- 
tion as  a  cause  of  difficulty  aild  alienation,  is  the  harsh  and  captious 
mode  of  speech  employed  by  many  religious  and  other  critics  toward 
the  views  of  men  of  science.  How  freely  are  such  terms  as  "  infidel," 
"  materialist,"  "  unbeliever,"  etc.,  applied  to  men  who  have  really 
neither  made  nor  intended  any  unkind  allusion  to  religious  men  or 
religious  truth,  but  whose  discoveries  have  led  them  to  the  presenta- 
tion of  views  whicli,  marking  an  advance  in  scientific  conceptions, 
involve,  perhaps,  some  changes  in  the  outward  form  of  conceiving 
certain  Scriptural  statements.  Instead  of  calm  and  fearless  inquiry, 
they  are  met  with  stern  and  positive  denunciation.  Instead  of  look- 
ing to  see  what  new  and  valuable  expansion  of  even  our  Scriptural 
conceptions  may  be  found,  many  religious  men  at  once  raise  the  cry 
of  infidelity,  and  force  the  unhappy  investigator  of  nature  into  a  posi- 
tion of  hostility  which  he  never  designed  to  assume.  I  myself  was 
never  moi'e  surprised  than  on  finding  the  magnificent  generalizafion 
of  the  Unity  and  Convertibility  of  Material  Forces  assailed  on  charges 
of  this  kind.  Generation  after  generation  this  process  has  gone  on, 
from  the  time  of  Galileo  till  to-day.  Astroiiomy  and  geology  have 
by  this  time  come  nearly  through  the  conflict  in  triumph.  Physics 
and  zoology  are  now  in  the  thick  of  the  fight.  The  next  genera- 
tion will  see  them  left  in  possession  of  the  field  ;  but,  alas,  will  the 
battle  be  still  raging  along  some  farther  line,  or  may  we  hope  for  a 
better  day  1  The  best  minds  in  the  Christian  Church  lament  this 
state  of  things  most  deeply.  It  is  but  a  week  ago  since  an  honored 
minister  of  the  Presbyterian  body  expressed  this  strong  regret  and 
anxiety  in  a  conversation  with  me,  mourning  over  the  unwise  and 
hasty  opposition  which  drives  men  of  science  into  an  unsought  atti- 
tude of  estrangement. 

Then,  too^,  apart  from  direct  censure  or  criticism,  there  is  a  slur- 
ring, contemptuous  mode  of  speech  tow^ard  science,  frequently 
indulged  in  by  some  writers,  which  is  as  unwise  as  it  is  unfair. 
Science  is  taunted  with  its  frequent  changes  of  views;  as  if  any 
advancing  knowledge  must  not,  of  necessity,  so  alter.  Then  there 
is  the  stock  argument  of  the  dissensions  and  disagreements  among 
the  expounders  of  science,  as  rendering  the  whole  matter  doubtful 


16  University  Convocation. 

and  trivial ;  jnst  as  though  every  department  of  human  thought, — 
history,  philosophy,  political  economy,  and  last,  but  not  least,  reli- 
gion, evangelical  or  other, —  did  not  present  the  same  spectacle,  of 
men  united  in  the  possession  of  certain  fundamental  principles,  but 
differing  widely  in  their  application  to  details.  No  one  complains 
more  frequently,  or  more  justly,  of  the  unfairness  of  this  objection, 
than  do  religious  teachers  when  it  is*  urged  by  unbelievers  as  an 
excuse  for  neglecting  the  Gospel.  But  it  is  equally  unfair  in  the 
other  application,  and  should  never  be  used  by  candid  thinkers, 
however  convenient  it  may  be  in  default  of  any  better.  It  is  a 
sword  which  cuts  only  the  hand  that  takes  it. 

All  this  is  not  only  unfortunate,  but  useless ;  not  only  useless, 
but  mischievous.  Denunciation  can  always  make  enemies,  but  never 
friends.  Some  of  the  ablest  writers  and  thinkers  of  our  day  have 
prejudiced  and  weakened  their  happiest  efforts  by  a  sharpness  of  man- 
ner that  stands  in  painful  contrast  to  the  truth,  the  dignity,  and  the 
real  fairness  of  their  matter.  Keligious  critics  must  learn  to  separate 
the  spiritual  truths  of  the  Divine  Gospel  from  the  physical  concep- 
tions of  creation  gained  from  Milton's  Paradise  Lost.  The  image  of 
God,  still  the  distinguishing  glory  of  humanity,  even  in  this  fallen 
state,  must  be  recognized  as  in  the  spiritual  character  and  not  in  the 
bodily  frame.  Until  this  is  done,  at  least  so  far  as  to  allow  for  the 
differing  conceptions  of  workers  in  a  different  field,  the  strife  must 
go  on  unceasingly  to  the  bitter  end, —  how  bitter  I  dare  not  say. 

But  the  remedy,  gentlemen  of  the  Convocation,  lies  with  the 
Christian  educators  of  our  country.  If,  along  with  an  earnest  spirit- 
ual faith,  they  shall  teach  caution,  patience,  and  kindliness,  a  true 
and  broad  sympathy  with  the  aims  and  methods  of  science,  and  the 
charity  which  "  thinketh  no  evil,"  we  may  hope  for  better  things  in 
the  days  that  shall  come  when  our  work  is  past. 

But  it  will  be  said  by  some,  that  "  the  danger  of  a  wide-spread 
infidelity  is  becoming  very  great.  Science  threatens  to  undermine 
all  the  foundations  of  faith.  Shall  we  utter  no  warning  and  venture 
no  reproof  V  I  reply,  the  greatest  danger,  by  far,  is  that  which  arises 
from  these  very  tendencies  on  which  I  have  dwelt.  The  foundations 
of  faith  have  suffered  nothing  from  the  adoption  of  scientific  views 
which,  in  times  past,  were  deemed  just  as  dangerous  as  these  which 
are  now  so  dreaded.  The  Copernican  astronomy,  the  ages  of  geology, 
the  nebular  hypothesis,  have  but  expanded  vastly  our  conceptions  of 
the  Creative  power  and  wisdom,  and  left  the  spiritual  energy  of  the 
Gospel  purer  than  before,  because  less  involved  with  unrelated  physi- 


Christian  Educators  and  Modern  Science.  17 

cal  ideas.  Why,  then,  should  the  doctrine  of  the  conversion  of  force, 
or  of  the  development  of  species,  awaken  fears  for  the  Christian 
faith  ?  It  is  no  new  and  strange  ordeal  through  which  it  is  called  to 
pass,  this  eliminating  of  certain  outward  forms  in  which,  for  a  time, 
it  had  been  clothed.  It  is  an  experience  which  belongs  to  every  age, 
and  is  essential  to  the  life  and  development  of  the  world.  Let  me 
not  be  misunderstood  here.  I  do  not  speak  of  the  spiritual,  but  of 
the  physical,  elements  in  our  religious  ideas.  One  of  the  leading 
American  magazines  for  the  coming  month  sounds  this  note  of  alarm 
in  a  strenuous  article,  that  seems  not  only  excessive,  but  undiscrimi- 
nating  as  to  these  very  distinctions  that  are  so  fundamental. 

Such  anxieties  arise  from  a  want  of  confidence  in  the  Divine  order- 
ing of  human  progress,  and  are  unworthy  of  the  calm  assurance  that 
should  be  the  mark,  as  it  is  the  privilege,  of  every  Christian  believer. 
It  is  ours  to  look  forward,  and  not  back,  to  the  Golden  Age,  to  rest 
in  joyful  certainty  of  the  coming  of  an  era  of  wisdom,  holiness,  and 
peace.  Every  past  century,  through  all  the  storms  of  history,  has 
contributed  to  this  result ;  and  as  believers  in  the  word  of  God,  we 
may  not  and  cannot  fear  that  His  plans  or  promises  shall  fail.  Our 
way  is  plain  and  our  duty  is  solemn.  Let  us,  as  guides  and  teachers 
of  youth,  labor  to  impress  upon  their  minds  and  hearts  the  inward 
grounds  of  spiritual  confidence.  Let  us  warn  them  against  the 
timorous  and  doubting  tendencies  which  go  far  to  create  the  very 
conflict  which  they  so  much  dread.  Let  us  teach  them  to  love  and 
honor  the  work  of  science,  and  to  base  their  faith  on  better  and 
broader  foundations  than  any  that  can  be  shaken  by  historical  or 
physical  discovery.  The  principles  of  the  Gospel — ruin  by  nature, 
atonement  by  Christ,  salvation  by  faith  in  Him  —  are  eternal  and 
unchangeable  as  He  from  whom  they  come ;  but  the  forms  and 
vehicles  in  which  they  are  received  must  change  with  the  changes  of 
human  thought  and  progress.  "  Let  us  not,  therefore,  judge  one 
another  any  more,  but  judge  this  rather,  that  no  man  put  a  stumbling- 
block,  or  an  occasion  to  fall,  in  his  brother's  way." 

It  is  difficult,  however,  for  men  to  change  conceptions,  which  are 
deeply  planted  in  their  minds,  and  associated,  however  needlessly, 
with  great  and  cherished  truths.  The  liberal  and  progressive  man  of 
to-day  becomes  the  conservative  and  the  reactionist  of  to-morrow. 
Thus  it  is  well  and  wisely  ordered  that  "  the  workmen  die,  but  the 
work  goes  on."  Nay,  it  must  be  so,  that  the  work  may  go  on.  Let 
us  follow  fearlessly  the  advance  of  truth,  seeking,  in  all  these  strifes 
and  collisions,  "  the  things  which  make  for  peace  ;"  and  when  at 
2 


18  Ujsiversity  Convocation, 

length  we  grow  into  the  mental,  as  into  the  physical,  rigidity  of  age, 
and  can  no  longer  keep  up  with  the  march  of  thought  and  knowledge, 
instead  of  doubting  or  despairing  as  to  the  result,  let  us  leave  the 
work  to  abler  and  stronger  laborers,  trusting  the  future  of  humanity 
to  Him  who  "  fainteth  not  neither  is  weary "  in  all  the  succession 
of  ages ;  and  let  us  rejoice  that  He,  who  has  planned  and  guided 
all  the  laws  and  all  the  stages  of  the  world's  long  epochs  of  deve- 
lopment, will  remove  us  from  a  sphere  wherein  our  usefulness  is 
ended,  to  a  renewed  condition,  of  power,  energy,  and  purity,  in  the 
kingdom  of  His  Son. 


Vr» 


